If you had the same reaction I did, you saw "COUNTY" and "ASSESSMENT" and thought it had something to do with property taxes. I had to study it a moment to realize it came from the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), and I've heard before about Republicans sending fundraising letters that look like government documents. I'd even received one myself. What about people who haven't heard what the Republicans have been doing?
Remember it became a controversy when Republicans made their mailings to look like official census documents. At least the one I wrote about last January said "OFFICIAL REPUBLICAN PARTY DOCUMENT". This new one clearly was meant to get me to open it on the assumption the county was trying to get a hold of me regarding my property taxes. It didn't get me to do that, but it did get me to open it to see if I could gain any insight into how the Republicans plan to campaign this year. Though much of it was the same points which I wrote about and debunked before, I did notice some notable things.
NRSC Aids Coleman Recount Effort: The National Republican Senatorial Committee has committed $750,000 to former Minnesota senator Norm Coleman to help cover the vast legal expenses incurred during the former incumbent's lengthy challenge to the election results of his race against Democrat Al Franken. Sources familiar with the move said it should not be read as a down payment for a prolonged Coleman legal battle at the federal level if he loses his ongoing challenge before the Minnesota Supreme Court but rather a good faith effort to keep him from going into massive debt.
Speaking of Minnesota Senate...Kaine Ups Pawlenty Pressure: Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine (Va.) has sent a letter to Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) urging him to call on Coleman to concede the race against Franken ... Barring an immediate call by Pawlenty for Coleman to end his legal challenge, which ain't happening, Kaine urged the Minnesota governor to agree to signing the election certificate for Franken if Coleman's ongoing appeal at the state Supreme Court level falls short. "To allow this to process to continue into the federal courts for no other reason than to deny for as long as possible the seating of another Democratic Senator would make what has been a bad situation for Minnesotans even worse," writes Kaine. This letter is part of a coordinated effort to pressure Pawlenty into taking sides rather than sitting on the sidelines. Pawlenty continues to debate whether to run for a third term as governor or to retire and begin planning for a presidential bid but either way he has an eye on his political future and Democrats want to [sic] his life as difficult as possible in the short run.
The financial numbers flying around this legal process are dizzying -- but I look at it this way. The more the NRSC is spending on keeping Coleman's challenge going, the less they're going to have to spend on protecting their vulnerable seats in 2010 -- of which there are going to be several.
A long, long time ago, it looked like Republican Norm Coleman had a solid lead in the Minnesota Senate race, and dirty ol' Al Franken wanted to sue his way to victory. So there was a recount of the votes.
To ensure that there was no hanky-panky in this recount, the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) put up a website, MinnesotaRecount.com, to track developments in the recount. The slogan for the website is "Keeping a watchful eye on Minnesota's Senate recount."
Well, the NRSC did indeed track developments in the recount, for a while. Y'see, the last post on the site is from November 30th. A whole month has passed since any news was added.
Has there been any developments in the recount since November 30th? Or did the recount end on November 30? I guess the Republicans just found it hard to come up with political spin in December.
Perhaps the slogan should change from "Keeping a watchful eye on Minnesota's Senate recount" to "Turning a blind eye to Minnesota's Senate recount."
(Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't be pushing political content on Sept. 11th, but the ad Diana talks about here was particularly dishonest, and it's worth talking about no matter what today's date is. - promoted by Joe Bodell)
In a television ad created by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, senate candidate Al Franken (D-MN) is being portrayed as an "angry partisan" who would deny prescription drug coverage to seniors if he could. The ad implies that incumbent Norm Coleman (R) cares more about prescription drug coverage for seniors than Franken does. But where do the candidates really stand on the issue of Medicare Part D?
Franken has said he would have voted against the measure which allowed for Medicare Part D, apparently because he is in favor of prescription drug coverage and affordable health care for seniors. The Pioneer Press article used in the NRSC's ad reads:
"Unlike Coleman, Franken said he would have voted against the measure that created Medicare Part D, which provided seniors prescription drug coverage, and the 2005 bankruptcy reform bill. Both, Franken said, were written by industry lobbyists..."
What the NRSC fails to mention is that under Medicare Part D, once total drug spending hits $2,250, coverage ends and seniors must pay for their medicine themselves. Their benefits resume only after they have spent $5,100 on prescription drugs.
More after the jump
(Originally posted with links at The Raabe Review)
